I am writing this Friday evening as the terrible news of the Connecticut shooting is still coming in so I know no more about it than do you. As a parent, grand parent, and great grandparent I still cannot begin to imagine the grief of the victims’ relatives. Even so there is one question that really haunts me—
Is there any difference between this shooting and an international situation where a drone aircraft kills an intended target along with a random number of gathered party goers?
We assume that in both cases there is a central target and a motive. Is there a difference? We don‛t know as yet concerning the Connecticut slayings but one assumes that a motive will emerge. It might be the result of insanity. Is a drone slaying “sane” that is carried out without due process and that results in “collateral damage “? Is there a difference?
I find it difficult not to remember that there used to be a time when “due process” existed. In those days, before an execution was carried out ( if that was the law ) it had to be authorized by a verdict brought down by a judge, or even a jury, after prosecution by the State and with skilled defence on behalf of the accused.
Did the “shooter”in Connecticut indulge in due process? No. Does that happen with drone attacks? No. Is there a difference?.
As a rural teenager I occasionally hunted groundhogs using a single shot .22. One groundhog at a time was about all even a good shooter could handle – the others all vanished at the first pop. I‛m not sure as yet but it appears that the Connecticut shooter may have used a rapid fire “assault”.223 plus a couple of other automatic weapons. But a drone uses bombs and heaven knows what else. Is there a difference?
I must confess that probably one shouldn’t write from the hip while news is still coming in but I cannot help but see the parallels between the micro and the macro.
I don‛t know. I grow tearful even thinking about it. What do you think?